Search for: "State v. Avila" Results 81 - 100 of 101
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Oct 2010, 2:35 am by John Hochfelder
Interfaith Medcial Center (2nd Dept. 2008) - post-natal brain hemorrhage and hydrocephalus led to infant’s cerebral palsy; $4,575,000 pain and suffering award reduced on appeal to $3,000,000 Avila v. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 4:04 pm by Abbott & Kindermann
(2) Does the ICCTA preempt a state agency’s voluntary commitments to comply with CEQA as a condition of receiving state funds for a state owned rail line and/or leasing state-owned property? [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 5:08 am by Kit Case
In 2013 one employee fraud case did crack the Top Ten, so the record is now 49-1 (employer fraud v. employee fraud) over the past five years. [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 7:06 pm by Dorothy
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. 5th District.Criminal law -- Sentencing -- Mandatory minimum -- Armed Career Criminal Act -- Predicate convictions -- Prior felony possession of short-barreled shotgun was not violent felony under ACCA -- District court properly declined to sentence defendant under ACCAUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. [read post]
4 Nov 2018, 10:56 am by Schachtman
Supreme Court Uproots Weeds in Garden State’s Law of Expert Witnesses” (Aug. 8, 2018). 4 2018 WL 3636867, at *20 (citing the Reference Manual 3d ed., at 597-99). 5 Cook v. [read post]
22 May 2017, 10:01 pm by Dan Flynn
It did succeed in narrowing the list of defendants to ABC and on-air reporter Jim Avila. [read post]
14 Jul 2014, 7:33 am by Joy Waltemath
Roger Vinson filed a lengthy dissenting opinion (Avila v Los Angeles Police Department, July 10, 2014, Hurwitz, A). [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 2:22 pm by admin
., that an individual will become ill or die within a stated period of time or by a certain age). [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 9:03 pm by renholding
[5] Commission Guidance Regarding Disclosure Related to Climate Change, Release No. 33-9106 (Feb. 2, 2010) [75 FR 6290 (Feb. 8, 2010)] [6] See Basic Inc. v. [read post]
It rejected the Council’s claim that the County improperly piecemealed the CEQA analyses for each amendment, because, as stated in Banning Ranch Conservancy v. [read post]
It rejected the Council’s claim that the County improperly piecemealed the CEQA analyses for each amendment, because, as stated in Banning Ranch Conservancy v. [read post]
It rejected the Council’s claim that the County improperly piecemealed the CEQA analyses for each amendment, because, as stated in Banning Ranch Conservancy v. [read post]